LA Times: Ron Paul's chump change

[sailingaway]

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla...ndraising.html

[wgadget]

Read and commented.

[Bern]

So the author is basically saying that Goldman Sachs will decide the elections?

[Feeding the Abscess]

So the author is basically saying that Goldman Sachs will decide the elections?

Willing to bet that majority of Loyola U's donation pool is Walter Block

[Chrysamere]

Absolutely awesome article! If you felt otherwise read it twice and see what it actually says about the doctor.. Nobody likes politicians paid for by corporations.

[wgadget]

So the author is basically saying that Goldman Sachs will decide the elections?

Hmmm...It's thinking like that which can be put to good use in COMMERCIALS. Seems like it would be a motivator of sorts to those who are angry with The Man.

[Aratus]

^the header is a draw, the article packs a sublime factoid gut punch?^

[ZanZibar]

Willing to bet that majority of Loyola U's donation pool is Walter Block

He has probably convinced his fellow faculty and staff to donate to him too.

[The Free Hornet]

Absolutely awesome article! If you felt otherwise read it twice and see what it actually says about the doctor.. Nobody likes politicians paid for by corporations.

The comments give this opinion nearly 100% support. This is a story with legs.

[Carole]

Very interesting portion of the article:

Sure, the nation’s economy is ailing. But in corporate America today, you can be sure of this: There may not be money for new workers, there may not even be money to keep workers, but there is always money for two things: bonuses for executives and funding for political candidates and causes.

And why is there plenty of political money? What, you think it's a coincidence you're eating poison cantaloupe? Or that Wall Street got bailed out but your line of credit got canceled? Or that a company wants to build a pipeline through a precious aquifer?

Paul put a positive spin on his fundraising:

"If you get $8 million … and you get it from small individual donors who are fervently engaged in campaigning for you, that’s a lot different than getting money that more than likely might have come, for the other candidates, from special interests," Paul said at a luncheon at the National Press Club. "All donors are not equal. I will take my small donations, with the enthusiasm of the people who send me the money."

Sure, that's one way to look at it. You could argue that Paul got about $80 each from 100,000 people. And that Perry got about $775 each from 22,000 people.

h xxp://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/10/ron-paul-rick-perry-mitt-romney-president-obama-political-fundraising.html

[mello]

So the author is basically saying that Goldman Sachs will decide the elections?

Is there a higher resolution pic of this? It's hard to make out some of the names on the donation list.

[acptulsa]

This slid to the second page of new posts way, way too fast.

Look at the poor, silly Americans trying to compete with the corporations and buy themselves some influence in their greatest represenative government in the world. How can you help but feel sorry for them, and wish them luck?

[Dreamofunity]

What's with the picture they posted? That $#@! is annoying.

[sailingaway]

Look at the poor, silly Americans trying to compete with the corporations and buy themselves some influence in their greatest represenative government in the world. How can you help but feel sorry for them, and wish them luck?

Yeah, the LA Times does seem to be saying, look, we think you are sweet, but you might as well give up.

[Fermli]

strange tone in the last half of the article. not sure what to make of it.

[Bern]

@mello - not that I know of.

[Paul4Prez]

The article makes no sense though. The big dollar donors with one-fifth the number of donors are tapped out. The grassroots candidate with five times as many donors can hit them up several more times. Ron Paul FTW.